She seems to feel that she was unfairly disadvantaged because Shayne was a "professional" actress. Chelsea says, "to me she was the falsest person here and for me to be up against her..." Matt Grant, the bachelor, comes to Shayne's defense. But despite Chelsea's allegations, an article in the Durango Herald shows us that Chelsea can do her own bit of acting.
"I think they're a better match," she nows says. "After watching the show, he's definitely not my type and not the man I thought he was. He's not athletically inclined, and I wouldn't want somebody to slow me down. When Shayne said she likes to shop, he thought that was cute. I didn't."
Sour grapes, anyone?
Then, to top it off, Wanstrath and many of her fellow contestants on the show, "thought Lamas, who is a professional actress, held an unfair advantage because of her experience in front of a camera." Wanstrath's mother adds, "we were suspicious of the whole thing - all these girls competing against a professional." (Read between the lines: "professional" means "super hot chick.")
What? Being a a professional actress gives her an unfair advantage in competing for a man's heart? I'd agree if it was an audience voting thing, but what does experience being in front of the camera have to do with how much he likes her? I'm not even going to go into whether Shayne is a good actress. Sure, it might enable her to play as though she likes him when she doesn't, but he still has to like her. And I'll concede that actresses apparently turned him on. But, hey, some men like girls who are frugal and can find China on a map.So, folks, that is what we call rationalizing in psychology terms, or just putting on a front (or acting) in street language.
